God has FINALLY heard my prayers . . .

[Stray Pooch]

My oldest son, who just turned 30 (yep, I got a thirty-something) is FINALLY getting married.  Since he met his intended at a New Year's Eve dance, they are geting wed on that date. 

Actually, as fate would have it, they met before then.  It turns out after comparing notes, they found that he had known her as a child.  She is in her mid-twenties so they were not "hang-out" friends at the time, but we had her father as a "home-teacher" (a church member who visits you at your home with a monthly lesson).  We went to visit our eldest last year and stopped by to visit the prospective in-laws.  They actually had a video of my family singing four-part harmony Christmas carols to them years ago!  We had completely forgotten them!

Since Val and I got married young (19 and 17 respectively) and our youngest just graduated, we have been wondering when the next generation was going to get busy and get here!  My family name, which I have traced back to A.D. 1095, has become (in my branch) an endangered species.  My branch of the family has had only-child sons or sons without progeny through seven generations.  My father had three boys and that was the most in any of the previous 5 generations.  My fourth great grandfather, James, had two sons.  His eldest, John, has a line of descendants all over the place.  I am descended from John's younger brother, William.  William is depending on my eldest to keep his branch going.  Here's how it works:

William had one son, Thomas.

Thomas had a daughter, Julia, who died young, and a son, Thomas Clarence. He had one other daugher, Ethel.  (Our family historian.  She died at 97 and I miss her to this day.)  She died childless.

Thomas Clarence had one son, Thomas Clifton.

Thomas Clifton had two sons, Thomas Clarence (my uncle Tommy) and George (my dad).

Uncle Tommy had one daughter, who died childless of a disease called MENS.

My dad had three sons, of which I am the middle.

My older brother had one daughter from his first marriage, who is in her twenties, and has a new daughter from his second marriage who is about 5.

My younger brother is unable to produce children.

That left it up to me.

I have had three sons. 

I gave it my best shot, Willie!

One of those three needs to get busy and produce at least one boy!  Otherwise, this entire line from William on down disappears.  Our family name is rather prominent in our historical home, and genealogists in that area have been going nuts for years trying to figure out where these few extraneous family-name bearers came from.  When I was able (courtesy of great-aunt Ethel's excellent memory and family history knowledge) to show where we fit in after contacting some of them on ancestry.com, there were some collective sighs of relief from the rest of the klan.  All of the desendants of John (and there are many) had been frantically trying to fit in all of those Thomases that were showing up on the census.  If Aunt Ethel hadn't preserved the info, it may well have been lost and remained unsolved.

Anyway, THAT is the pressure situation being put on my eldest.  Produce or KILL A WHOLE LINE OFF, BOY!!!   And the fact that one of his brothers is gay narrows the odds even more (though that one is seriously questioning his homosexuality now, so maybe the gene pool isn't as shallow as it appears!).

A New Year's Eve wedding.  Two reasons in one to pop the cork and we're Mormons.  But ahh, the root beer will flow.

I'm just trying to figure out how they are going to make it to the NYE dance.  Seems to me they would likely be a bit busy . . .

Sunrise, sunset . . .

[Xavier_Onassis]

I thought the deal was that God was everywhere at once and listening to everyone, all the time.

And yet, when someone gets what they wanted, they say that "Finally, God heard my prayers".

I suppose that this is a more encouraging viewpoint than the obvious one: "Finally, God has stopped ignoring me."

I imagine that this is one more example of adjusting our theology to the needs of our egos.

In any event, congratulations.

[fatman]

Congratulations Pooch.

[sirs]

*standing O*         

[Brassmask]

Congrats, Stray!

I, too, was the only son left to carry on the family name.  Luckily, I fulfilled that task already.  Congrats to you and good luck on a future grandson.

[kimba1]

congratulations

as a only son I know about such a borden it is.

[Stray Pooch]

Thanks for the good wishes, guys.  XO, you should know I only chose that title somewhat tongue-in-cheek.  In fact, in this case it was less God answering my prayers and more Chris answering his mother's nagging.

[Xavier_Onassis]

XO, you should know I only chose that title somewhat tongue-in-cheek.  In fact, in this case it was less God answering my prayers and more Chris answering his mother's nagging.
===========================================
That is what I suspected.

I still think that there is an interesting aspect to the mentality behind the idea that people who claim that God knows, hears and sees all, have, but still they say that he never ignores anyone's prayers, but only answers some.

I guess the idea of a Deity that ignores us is too unattractive to recognize.

[sirs]

Xo is one of those many who confuses "ignore" with an answer of "no".  That's ok, we won't hold it against you.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Xo is one of those many who confuses "ignore" with an answer of "no".  That's ok, we won't hold it against you.

=============================
As usual, you are being illogical.

The original story is one in which a specific request is made of the Supreme Being, followed by a period in which nothing happened, and of course, said omnipotent Supreme Being, who COULD provide a sign, but does not, did not, as is his wont.

Then, the request was honored.

My comment was that people have difficulty recognizing that they have been ignored.

If I ask you for something, and you do not respond, it is clear you are ignoring me, since you have the power to say "no".
No one, including you (assuming that you are being logical) would deny that this is not an answer of "no", but clearly a case of you ignoring me.

The proper assumption here is not than an answer of "no" has been given, since eventually, as Pooch indicates, the request was honored. So the proper assumption is that no answer at all in this case was an answer of "later".

Still, it is difficult for a logical mind to grasp an all-powerful, caring being whose lack of responsiveness must be interpreted.

Was the lack of an answer to my prayer this time a "no", or a "later", or a "I really don't care", or a "quit bugging me, I am inventing a new universe today"?

The latter creates a problem with the assumption that God is omnipotent.

So does the sentence in th Bible about God "resting" on the seventh day. An omnipotent being, by definition, does not get tired, and does not require rest any more than you or I require hibernation.

I observe that when people suggest that the views given of the Supreme Being by some religion are illogical or actually impossible, the response is never that perhaps the Bible or some other religious text is illogical, it is that somehow my logic, in which 1+1=2, is not the logic of the Deity.

That's a cop-out. It is done because the believers are too lazy to examine their beliefs logically.




Unfortunately the logicann

[Lanya]

Bravo, Pooch!
 (Says the mother of two sons. 

[sirs]

Xo is one of those many who confuses "ignore" with an answer of "no".  That's ok, we won't hold it against you.

=============================
As usual, you are being illogical.

Naaaaaa......the illogical one here is the one equating ignoring a request with basically saying no to a request

[Xavier_Onassis]

Naaaaaa......the illogical one here is the one equating ignoring a request with basically saying no to a request


Not at all.

Saying NO is not the same thing as ignoring.
Although we are discussing an all-powerful, yet largely mute, Supreme Being here.

No, I didn't hear you, I didn't understand you, and I am ignoring you are four different responses.

Do you dispute that an omniscient, omnipotent being is incapable of actually capable of  communicating via some manner other than silence?

[Amianthus]

Do you dispute that an omniscient, omnipotent being is incapable of actually capable of  communicating via some manner other than silence?

If there is communication, it eliminates the element of faith.

[Xavier_Onassis]

If there is communication, it eliminates the element of faith.
==============================
So whucking fut?

Why should this even be necessary?

Even if God answers you verbally, you still have to believe that it was not a message from <turn on echo box> SATAN! <turn off echo box>.
That involves faith, does it not?

So we are disputing the amount of faith, not the presence of it.

The Supreme Being has attributes of being omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, omnibenevolent, and mute

One of these things is not like the other;
One of these things is not the same.
Can you find it, children?